CASE STUDIES OF FAILED

COMPONENTS
 Introduction
• Most of the current day failures are due to
mistakes of :
– Operator
– Manufacturer
– Designer or
– Inspector
• It will be evident when we go through some of
the case studies
 Objectives
• To demonstrate by examples through actual
reports investigated in Metallurgical Lab
Case study of Broken journal of
wagon no. SR 27807 TG(L)RB
investigated at KGPW
 Background
• A goods T/No. D/DRG LPG got derailed while
on run with w/no. SR-27807 on 5.12.96 due to
cold breakage of journal
• ROH (wagon) at PWS(Phulwari Sharif)/ER/DNR
 Test conducted
• Visual examination & fracture study
• Chemical test
• Mechanical test
• Micro-examination
 Visual examination & fracture study
• The axle fractured
transversely at a
distance of 271 mm
from one of the ends.
• The f/f showed fatigue
(70%) originated from a
weld spot (mainly)
 Chemical & Mechanical tests
• Chemical test:
– Carbon%....................................0.49
• Mechanical test:
– Hardness(HB)………………………….179,183
(on the section away from fracture)
– Hardness(HB)…………………………..509,516
(on the surface close to weld spot)
• UTS(kgf/mm2)………………………….62.5
(calculated from average hardness value)
 Micro-Examination

• Section-Longitudinal
• Observation:(etched)-
– martensite & bainite
(close to fracture)
– ferro- pearlitic structure(ASTM grain size 6&7)
(on the body away from the fracture)
 Spec No. R-16/1995
Test parameter Specified
UTS (N/mm2) 550-650
Chemical composition:-
C% 0.45-55
Mn% 1.12 Max
Si% 0.15-0.46
Cr% 0.30 MAX
Ni% 0.30 MAX
Mo% 0.05 Max
V% 0.05 Max
Cu% 0.30 Max
S% 0.03 Max
P% 0.03 Max
Micro-exam:-
Grain size Not coarser than 5
Structure Normalised structure
 Discussion
• VE indicated presence of weld spot at the
origin of f/f
• Chemical composition, Hardness & UTS-OK as
specified in IRS:R-16
• Micro structure-OK
 Conclusion
• VE suggested that the axle had failed due to
initiation of fatigue crack mainly from weld
spot
• Sufficient heat might have generated due to
drip of the weld pool on the axle surface
forming martensite/ bainite which have acted
as an origin of fatigue crack.
Case study of failed Helical spring
of L/No.15506 WDP2 investigated
at M&C/RDSO
 Background
• Date of fitment…………..20.02.2002
• Date of failure…………….02.04.2002
• Life spanned………………one month (approx)
 Tests conducted

• VE & fracture study

• Chemical comp & Hardness test
• Metallographic exam
• Supplier: M/s G.B.Springs
 VE & Fracture study
Showing small fatigue zone
• The spring fractured from 2nd
coil in fatigue manner (small
fatigue zone covering a depth
of about 11 mm)
• Noticed biting/rubbing
(homing- 2nd coil rubbing with
the 1st coil) marks on almost
whole of the coils
• Observed a longitudinal
surface crack adjacent to
biting mark on the 2nd coil.
Showing Biting/rubbing marks
 Chemical & Hardness tests
• Chemical composition:
C%...........................0.56
Mn%........................0.95
Si%...........................0.24
Cr%..........................1.15
Mo%........................0.18
V%............................0.10
• Hardness (BHN):
On the surface………415, 429
At the core……………415, 429
 Metallographic exam
• Macro-exam (deep etched in 1:1 HCl)
– Revealed no abnormality
• Micro-exam:
– Unetched (Inclusion rating on longitudinal
section):
• Revealed 0.5 Thin (sulphide) & 0.5 Thin oxide
• Etched: (Transverse section):
– Decarburisation- 0.08 mm
– Structure: fine tempered martensite
 Discussion
• VE revealed small fatigue zone initiated from
longitudinal surface crack present adjacent to
biting/rubbing mark.
• Presence of biting marks indicates that the spring
was excessively loaded. Due to such load a
localized surface crack was produced which led to
formation of fatigue & ultimate fracture of spring
• Chemical composition, Hardness, Macro-exam &
Micro-exam as per spec no.WD-01-HLS-
94(Rev.1)……………OK
 Spec. IS:3195/95 Gr 51CrMoV
Test parameter Specified
Hardness (BHN) 415-460 (as perspec no.WD01-
HLS-94(Rev.1)
Chemical composition:- (as per IS:3195/95 Gr 51 CrMoV)
C% 0.48-0.58
Mn% 0.70-1.10
Si% 0.15-0.40
Cr% 0.9-1.2
Mo% 0.15-0.25
V% 0.07-0.12
S% 0.035 Max
P% 0.035 Max
Decarburisation, mm 1.9 max (0.5% of nominal dia)
Micro structure TM
 Inclusion rating: on longitudinal
section
Inclusion Rating Sulphide Oxide
Thin Thick Thin Thick
Found 0.5 - 0.5 -
Specified as per spec no. 2.0 max 2.0 max 2.0 max 2.0 max
WD-01-HLS-94(Rev.1)
 Conclusion
• The spring had failed due to fatigue initiated
from localized surface crack formed due to
excessive load on spring, which is evident
from sign of homing of coil.
Case study of Failed Wheel Disc of
L/No. 23995 WAG-5H investigated
at RDSO
 Background
• Fitted on 12.02.1999
• Failed in service on 21.12.2001
• Last checked on 28.12.2000
• Expected service life 3 years(approx)
• Condemning criteria 1016 mm
 Tests conducted
• VE & fracture study & Wear Measurement
• Chemical test
• Mechanical test
• Metallographic Examination
 VE & fracture study
• The wheel fractured by
fatigue
• A ‘V’ shape 11.9 mm
deep punch mark
(against 10.0 mm Max. Photograph showing the cracked pieces with
deep punch marks on front rim side and fracture
specified) on front rim ends shown by arrow head.
side
Photograph showing the
• Slight corrugation on slight corrugation, more
the tread surface towards brake application
area
(more towards brake
application area)
• Wheel tread worn out
up to 30 mm depth
Photograph showing the Photograph showing the
fatigue fracture initiated close view of the fatigue
from deep punch mark. zone.
 Chemical test
• Chemical Comp:
C%...................................0.65
Mn%...................................0.76
Cr%..................................0.10
Ni%..................................0.08
Mo%..................................0.01
Cu%................................0.073
V%.................................0.007
S%.................................0.025
P%.................................0.022
 Mechanical tests
• Hardness(HB):
– 6mm below existing tread surface...302,293
– 7mm below existing tread surface covering
HAZ……………………………………………….248, 255
– 17mm below existing tread surface..285
• Tensile test:
– UTS(N/mm2)………………………………….997.70
– Elongation%.......................................13.39
• Impact Energy in J(v-notch Charpy test)-7.0
 Metallographic Examination
• Macro-exam:
– Revealed HAZ
• Micro-exam(one piece from std location & other
containing punch mark )
– Std location:-
• Unetched: (Inclusion rating):2.0 Thin (sulphide) & 1.5 Thin
(oxide)
• Etched: Fine pearlite & ferrite at places with ASTM grain size
4&5
– Containing punch mark: Decarburisation around
punch mark
– Fine pearlite with dispersed specks of ferrite with
ASTM grain size 6-7 at HAZ
 Spec. IRS-R-34/99
Test parameter Specified
UTS (N/mm2) 980 min
E% 8.0 Min
Hardness (BHN) up to depth of 30 300-341
mm from tread surface
Chemical composition:-
C% 0.57-0.67
Mn% 0.60-0.85
Si% 0.15 Min
Cr% 0.25 Max
Ni% 0.25 Max
Mo% 0.06 Max
V% 0.05 Max
Cu% 0.28 Max
S% 0.03 Max
P% 0.03 Max
Micro – exam:-
Grain size Not coarser than 5
Structure Normalised structure
 Discussion
• VE revealed that wheel had broken due to fatigue
initiated from deep punch mark on front rim side
which had acted as high stress raiser for initiation
of crack
• Chemical comp, physical properties & inclusion
rating-OK
• Macro-exam revealed HAZ (11.3mm depth) [no
HAZ away]caused due to brake binding, resulted
heat generation in the rim region. The abnormal
rise in temp may cause reversal of stress
• Decarburisation around the p/mark had
aggravated the initiation of fatigue
 Conclusion
• The failure is attributed to the presence of
deep p/mark associated with decarburisation
around it. Reversal of stress might have
caused due to rise in temp input by brake
binding as evidenced by change of micro-
structure up to a certain depth in tread.
 Remedial measure
• B/Binding to be totally avoided
• P/mark on the hub only
• UST to prevent failures from internal flaws
 Case study of failed Crank Shaft of
Loco No.14049 of Ernaculam Diesel
Shed
 Background
• Mfr…….M/s CSR/Ziyang
• Date of mfg……..7/2006
• Date of fitment…26.9.2006
• Date of failure…28.5.2009
• Spec: DLW spec no.31PD5203(Gr42CrMo)
 Tests conducted
• VE & fracture study
• Chemical comp & Hardness test
• Metallographic exam
 VE & Fracture study
• 90% fatigue initiated
from sharp edge of
key way slot at wheel
seat portion
• Observed dents, metal
deformation & scoring Key way
Photograph showing counter fracture
marks on cyl surface faces of Crank shaft .
of gear seat journal
adjacent to the collar.
Initiation
of fatigue Photograph showing dent Nucleus
mark , metal deformation Of fatigue
and scoring mark on g/seat
journal
 Chemical comp & Hardness test
• Chemical comp:
– C%0.44, Mn%0.88, Si%0.30, Cr%0.99, Mo%0.20,
V%0.0008
– Specified:C%0.38-0.45; Mn%0.5-0.8; Si%0.17-
0.37; Cr%0.9-1.2;Mo%0.15-0.25;V%--
• Hardness:
– On hardened layer: Rc-46,47 (sp- Rc..44-50)
– At parent metal (sec): BHN-244,245(sp..241-302)
 Metallographic test
Induction
• Macro-exam: Depth of Harden
Layer
3.40 mm

induction hardening-3.4- 9.00mmm

9.0 mm
• Micro-exam- Photo macrograph showing induction
hardened layer of crank shaft
– Inclusion rating:
• 1.0 thin(sulphide); 1.0 oxide
(thin)
– Structure:
• TM on hardened layer &
resolved & unresolved
pearlite as genl structure Photo micrograph showing
mainly resolved &unresolved
pearlite in the matrix of ferrite.
 Discussion
• VE indicated sharp edge of key way slot at
wheel seat portion
• CC & Hardness—OK
• Metal deformation & scoring mark on the
wheel seat journal shows that there was
relative motion between split gear and journal
meaning the interference between the two
matting surfaces were lost and the key fitted in
the key way would have also damaged.
 Discussion
• Relative motion between split gear & wheel seat
journal produced sudden forces resulting in initiation
of fatigue from the sharp edge of key way.
• Presence of non uniform case depth on the main
bearing journal varying from 3.4 mm to 9.00 mm
showed the possibility of building up of non uniform
residual compressive stresses, release of which, during
service would have resulted distortion in the
crankshaft.
• Distortion would have resulted in unusual vibration in
the crankshaft and consequential fatigue initiation
from the stress raiser (key way & seat of gear seat
journal).
 Conclusion
• The failure of crankshaft in fatigue manner
covering 90% fatigue initiated from key way
may be attributable to relative motion
between split gear and wheel seat journal.
05 Case studies of knuckles
investigated at LLH(W)
 Particulars
Case S/No. at W/No. Dt of POH IOH/R R/Dt
No. LLH(W) failure OH
1. S/183/11 w/no.BVZISWR86150907383 30.3.11 TEXMA BIA/12/1 NA
16/4/09 1/10

2. S/180/11 w/no.CR-BCNMI/L-151610 01.4.11 KTTW- NJP 03/201

07/03/07 09/09/10 3
3. S/211/11 w/no.SE-175741(BOXN/Ld 19.4.11 RVPS- VSPS- 08/13
30/12/08 22/7/10

4. S/289/11 w/no.WR BCN/L 311104/ 30.5.11 JUDH- NA 03/17

27/1/11
25889
5. S/316/11 w/no. BOBYN 700809/ 07.6.11 BESCO NA NA
27.03.09
00354
 Photographs of failed knuckle
S/No.183-11 S/No.180-11 S/No.211-11

Shrinkage Cavity Non-uniform wall thickness

S/No.289-11 S/No.316-11 Non-Metallic/Slag inclusions

Darkened (oxidized) area

indicating presence of old crack Blow Hole & Shrinkage cavity
 VE
Case Location of Nature of Other observations Id. mark
N0. fracture fracture
1. 96 mm from Tr & Shrinkage cavities/porosities (25% of HTE, S,
the tail end crystalline fractured area) 1501
2. 120 mm Tr & Core shift-noticed HTE, RIL, 3
from the tail crystalline Wall thickness-not uniform (it was20 05
end mm at one face & 30mm at other face
3. 180 mm Tr & Non-metallic/ slag inclusion( 5% of HTE, RIL D
from tail crystalline fractured area) 435, 308
end
4. 50 mm from Tr & Oxidised area on the f/f indicating RANGA,
the nose crystalline presence of old crack 511 THE
end
5. 50 mm from Tr & Shrinkage cavities/blow holes (60% of HTE, Rest
the nose crystalline fractured area) not clear
end
 Tests
Case Chemical composition(%) Hardness Micro exam
No. (BHN)
C Mn Si Cr Ni Mo

1. 0.30 1.50 0.50 Nil Nil Nil 227 TM

2. 0.28 0.90 0.40 Nil Nil Nil 337 TM
3. 0.30 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.60 0.20 357 TM
4. 0.30 1.00 0.50 0.50 0.60 0.20 357 TM
5. 0.31 1.05 0.52 0.55 0.55 0.22 268 TM
Specifi 0.28- 0.80- 0.40- 0.50- 0.50- 0.15- 261 – 291 TM
ed 0.33 1.10 0.60 0.80 0.80 0.25
 Discussion
Case VE Chemical composition Hardness Micro exam
No.
1. Presence of casting Does not conform to Lower than Satisfactory
defects reduced the load latest spec no.48-BD- specified
bearing capacity & acted 02, Gr.E amendt no.2
as points of stress of Jan-2007
concentration zone
2. --Do-- --Do-- Higher than Satisfactory
specified
3. --Do-- Conforms --Do-- Satisfactory
4. Presence of old crack Conforms --Do-- Satisfactory
5. Presence of casting Conforms Satisfactory Satisfactory
defects reduced the load
bearing capacity & acted
as points of stress
concentration zone
 Conclusion
Case Conclusion
no.
1. The failure is considered under impact loading accentuated by lower hardness
& presence of casting defects
2. The failure is considered under impact loading accentuated by higher hardness
& presence of casting defects
3. The failure is considered under impact loading accentuated by higher hardness
& presence of casting defects
4. Presence of old crack acted as prime cause of failure & higher hardness as a
contributory factor
5. Presence of casting defects (60% of total fractured area) gave rise to weak zone
& caused failure in service
 Remedial measure
Case No. Remedial measure
1. i)HT to be carefully monitored to achieve stipulated hardness
ii)Appropriate steps to be taken to prevent casting defects
2. i)HT to be carefully monitored to achieve stipulated hardness
ii)Appropriate steps to be taken to prevent casting defects
3. i)HT to be carefully monitored to achieve stipulated hardness
ii)Appropriate steps to be taken to prevent casting defects by
adopting (a)proper metal pouring technique (b) thorough oxdn
(c)effective skimming
4. HT to be carefully monitored to achieve stipulated hardness & also
preventing development of any crack during manufacturing stage
5. Proper solidification process should be adopted & moulds should be
properly dried to avoid formation of blow holes/ shrinkage cavities.
THANK YOU